Ursula Stephens (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary Assisting the Prime Minister for Social Inclusion) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the order of consideration of government business orders of the day for the remainder of today be as follows:

No. 14    Fisheries Legislation Amendment (New Governance Arrangements for the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and Other Matters) Bill 2008.

No. 2      Quarantine Amendment (National Health Security) Bill 2008.

No. 3      Higher Education Support Amendment (2008 Budget Measures) Bill 2008.

No. 4      Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment (Employment Entry Payment) Bill 2008.

No. 5      Commonwealth Securities and Investment Legislation Amendment Bill 2008.

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to the motion:

At the end of the motion, add:

No. 18    Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008

Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008.

There have been discussions between the coalition, the government and other parties in relation to this bill. I might say that the coalition has circulated its amendments in the chamber. The government is well aware of the amendments that the coalition is putting forward, as are other parties. I believe the Senate is ready to deal with these bills and it should do so, especially when one considers that we are in a committee stage, we have had the second reading and there will be an opportunity this evening, albeit at the end of the list of bills. I am saying that, when you take into account those other bills, anything that the government needs to be considered can be considered in the interim.

This is something which has been discussed over a period of time. There is nothing new in the amendments and nothing which will come as a surprise to the government. Having regard to the heavy legislative agenda that the government has for next week, it would be undesirable to leave this hanging over until next week’s program. I simply do not see any reason at this stage to take these bills off the list of bills to be considered. I was under the impression we were going to keep all the bills on the list, including the wheat bills, and discussions would be ongoing between the government, the coalition and other parties if needs be. But that was not a block to these bills proceeding tonight. We believe that they should be dealt with tonight.

Andrew Bartlett (Queensland, Australian Democrats) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will just ask a question by way of a small speech on the amendment to the motion. Certainly the Democrats do not have any objection to going through these bills and the wheat bills as well, if they are brought on. I really wanted to just clarify this. My understanding had been that, whatever stage we were through with the bills listed on the red, we would be going to the wheat bills after the dinner break at 7 pm. I just want to clarify that, if wheat is added, does that mean that, even if we are not through the others by 7 pm, we would start on wheat, or do we just go through the list for as long as we have got?

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I take it the question is directed to the coalition with its proposed amendment. As the motion moved by the government stands, the wheat bills would not be considered at all tonight. The government is proposing that wheat be considered at the end of the list of bills which has been circulated by the coalition. So we are saying that you deal with all the other bills first and then you deal with the wheat bills in committee. I think that answers Senator Bartlett’s question.

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I might just try to contribute to the debate a little bit. I have come in halfway through, so I might get Senator Ellison to reiterate the position he is putting. I missed it as I came to the chamber. As I understand it, he is seeking to add the wheat bills to the list. It is a little unusual for the opposition to be determining the government program. They do not seem to have understood that they are not in government anymore. In respect of the wheat bills, we are trying to facilitate the debate for the committee stage in this place. However, these matters are in a state of flux. We do think we should have sufficient time to look at the amendments to see if we can find any common ground between the relevant shadow minister and the minister responsible. That process also includes the usual processes we have as a government to ensure that, if we are going to debate or even deal with the amendments moved by the opposition, we do have adequate time to give you a clear view of what our position is, rather than you as an opposition simply opposing or amending without any regard to what the government is trying to achieve, as we saw in respect of the disallowance motion for the teen dental program.

Having said that, we think that we can foreshadow an amendment which omits the remainder of the day and substitutes from 3.45 pm till 6.30 pm. This means the wheat bills will still be listed at 7 pm. That may go some way to a solution. I wanted to be able to—and I thought we had an understanding on this—come back at some point and deal with the wheat bills by including them in the agenda if we could find a position where we could agree to have them dealt with this evening. If not, we are in the unfortunate position of still being at odds with the opposition on this. I foreshadow that amendment.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Where does your foreshadowed amendment fit into the motion that you proposed?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It would fit in as follows: the motion on the routine of business would say, ‘I move that the routine of business from 3.45 pm till 6.30 pm shall be in the terms circulated in the chamber.’

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All right. Is the foreshadowed amendment clear?

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For absolute clarity, I will seek advice from the Clerk that, if that is accepted, the Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008 and the Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008will still remain on the red for the evening.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, under the previous order, my understanding is that the wheat bills would then come on when the Senate resumes after the dinner break.

Chris Ellison (WA, Liberal Party, Manager of Opposition Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On that basis, the coalition then agrees to that amendment, so we agree to leave being given for that to be moved and I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.

Leave granted.

John Hogg (Queensland, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Ludwig, do you wish to move your foreshadowed amendment?

Joe Ludwig (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Manager of Government Business in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move an amendment to the motion:

Omit “for the remainder of today”, substitute “from 3.45 pm till not later than 6.30 pm today”.

Question agreed to.

Original question, as amended, agreed to.